How to burn Digiweb legally

[darkrabbit]

For quite along time i have watched the comments on this forum , about Digiweb . Now its my turn today i caught digiweb out in there own greed i have the same problem as most posting here been caped etc, i tryed comreg at first waste of time and all the rest why there is no legislation in place too control these broadband companys. so i went to the small claims court they havent dealt with anything like this but are willing to then when i went to my atm machine i found a transaction had been taken out all 122 euros worth and 31 cent so i marched down asked my beloved bank manager how **** did this happen , he looked at screen and went digiweb , you see my friends when i asked how and why he mentioned that i must given written permission alias i told my dear manager i never had but had made a laser payment last month , too mangers shock he said and informed that unless digiweb had written permission they cant use my credit card details and have commited a crimal act , and asked would i ring them just to confirm that they had and get back to him tomorrow morning , so i did and recorded there confirmation onit yes sir we recived your payment, i said thank you just checking while recording them.now i advise anyone had this done to them what digiweb did is against the law they wont want to be brought to court on this so make a small claim aginst them as they will cough up in other word s kiss your arse as they wont want media coverage ie the papers , i will keep you posted on my coming day as i will ring digiweb tomorrow and look for there explantion on this and when they give me there view i will be sitting with my bank manager saying here talk to him he liked to know why you used credit card details without the written permission guess what people i can here a homer simpson moment coming on with this crowd DOH.

[trant]

Are you saying that you recorded your telephone conversation with Digiweb without telling the person on the other end that they were being recorded? If so I'm afraid you have committed a criminal act!

The recording of the conversation by a third party without the consent
of one of the parties to a telephone conversation would be an illegal
interception and a criminal offence for the purposes of section 98 of
the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983 as amended by
section 13 of the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications
Messages (Regulation) Act, 1993 ('the 1993 Act'). Section 13 of the 1993
Act provides that the definition of 'intercept' 'does not include
listening or recording where either the person on whose behalf the
message is transmitted or the person intended to receive the message has
consented to the listening or recording (my emphasis). Section 13 (3) of
the 1993 Act provides as follows:-

'The following subsections are hereby substituted for subsection (5) of
the said section 98:

(5) A person who discloses the existence, substance or purport of
a telecommunications message that was transmitted by the Minister before
the vesting day and intercepted or who uses for any purpose any
information obtained from any such message shall be guilty of an
offence.

(6) In this section 'intercept' means listen to, or record by any
means, in the course of its transmission, a telecommunications message
but does not include such listening or recording where either the person
on whose behalf the message is transmitted or the person intended to
receive the message has consented to the listening or recording, and
cognate words shall be construed accordingly.'

It appears therefore that if the consent of one of the parties to a
telephone conversation has been obtained, no offence will have been
committed by merely recording the conversation. One of the other
questions that frequently arises is the law in relation to the practice
of many businesses of recording conversations with their customers, or
prospective customers, normally for training purposes. In this
situation, the interaction does not involve interception by a third
party. The practice of most well run businesses is to provide for
consent to recording of telephone conversations in their standard terms
and conditions for their goods and/or services. Where no contract has
been concluded, the practice seems usually to be to inform the customer,
or prospective customer, by means of an automated message that the
conversation may be recorded and the purpose for which the recording is
being made. By continuing to participate in the conversation, the
prospective customer would in my view, have given implied consent to the
recording of the conversation.

(Ref: https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/w...law&D=1&P=1565 )

Did you sign a DD mandate with Digiweb when you signed up and decide to pay the bill over the phone instead? If so, what probably happened is that you paid over the phone after Digiweb sent their Direct Debit run to the bank. There should be no problems with returning your money - this kind of situation happens all the time.

Also, you should change your payment details with Digiweb if you intend to change your payment method permanently to avoid this happening in the future.

I don't work for Digiweb or have any vested interest (although I am a satisfied customer) but I can't see why you would like to "burn" Digiweb over a simple mistage that 1) is very easily rectified and 2) happens all the time.

[darkrabbit]

well for someone that had no vested interest as such , you went into great detail to point out a article of Law.
which means to me is that your something more than a satisfied customer of
Digiweb have to say that bit touched me deeply ,
it sounds more like a employee
of Digiweb or legal department off them, would you say,
i await your response .

[trant]

I have no vested interest in Digiweb and I am not an employee. I don't know how I can make this any clearer.

As for the legal reference, a simple Google search found that one!

Did you call Digiweb to see if they can refund the payment?

[darkrabbit]

have you gone through most of the discussions, that relate too unsatisfied
customers here in forums that involves Digiwebs conduct towards the paying public , let me pick one A when you look at their main page you see this
when your making your choice , lets go metro 3mb download upload speed is 512k, traffic quota is 30 gb and the price 34.99 that includes vat.
well that had been the first package i picked
then the horror story started when i went over my 30 gb to 40 gb
i got this fantastic email
Dear Customer

It has come to our attention that you have vastly exceeded your usage limit for
the broadband package you have selected.

As a result your connection speed will be limited for the coming days to bring
you back within the agreed usage limits.

Should you require more download allowance, you should consider upgrading your
service package.

Once you are back within the agreed limits we will naturally reset your
connection.

You can view your traffic statistics via the following webpage
http://mytraffic.digiweb.ie

If require any further information please contact support@digiweb.ie

Support Team



I went ok ill start at 0 in the following month
now guess what my speeds were cut and this dragged on for about two weeks , which i thought was extreme so contacted them and they explained this rolling back lark which mean s when you hit 30 your speed picks back up but like many here you go over that within cpl of days and you get same notice again plus speeds are cut and you lark around for another two weeks at 122kbs , now is that what you really signed up for no ,
this becomes a dejvu nightmare , if i was to sit for clock to reset to zero that in theory is a whole month gone where you are really paying for a service that lead you to belive was 30 gb a month,
now as for the other thing ill let you know soon

[trant]

To be honest I got caught out by the same thing when I signed up. I ended up having to move up to the 5mb package as 30gb simply wasn't enough. As it stands there seems to be no way to increase your download limit without upgrading your speed.

The rolling limit is a pain in the ass but I suppose it's better than hitting your limit mid-way through the month and not being able to use it for a week or even more.

[darkrabbit]

yes i did the same upgraded 5MB, but guess what did i get the speed for
the first cpl of days yes , after that this great thing happened what i paying for the 3MB speed wise i am getting it on the 5MB and at time little below the 3mb, you see my point its a no win when comes to these packages you still dont get what your paying for, i view this nation like sheep when something is done to us we all go BAH , but there is few us that are willing to take on coperate companys for our rights i am one i know out their in this land there is others, and it takes a few to bring these cowboys to justice

[trant]

Did you apply for a static IP address so you get the lower contention ratio?

Also check your modem stats to make sure you actually are on the 5mb package.

Go to http://192.168.100.1/ and look for "Upstream Data Rate", should be 5120 Ksym/sec.

[darkrabbit]

Have to say your a bit of a MacGyver when comes too various soultions,
went to that link and yes Upstream Data Rate", should be 5120 Ksym/sec.
but quistion i have its that even when my speeds have nose dived
, so MacGyver explain that for me thats not been sarcastic either towards you.

[phutyle]

trant, if you read the first line of the passage you quoted, you yould clearly see that is applies to the recording of a conversation by a third party without the consent of one of the parties to a telephone conversation. Since the OP was one of the parties in the conversation, he can't be a third party, so he has not committed a criminal act. In any case the passage goes on to clearly state that only the consent of ONE participant in the conversation is needed - not all parties need to give their consent.

It's perfectly legal to record any conversation that you participate in yourself, without the consent of the other person.

[darkrabbit]

This began over money taken out ones account,
now way i see it is that you sign mandate that gives permission
to take the aqquired amount through direct debit, perfect and above board,
now what happens when one day you ring up and you use your credit card ,which i state was not signed in that mandate direct debit i signed was for them too go into my account , but as it happens that they kept the details of that card without my permission and made two transactions over two month period, this is what i had been saying and what i found out is they cant keep the details of your card unless you singed something to state it which i didnt.

[colin74]

no they can not keep the details of your card.

that is illegal!

I know that because my gf's dad works in Bank of Ireland and my gf is a manager customer services and she kicked up almighty hell when she found out Irish broadband had kept out credit card details & were taking a month after service had been cut off!!!!!

as a result we got the money back ,with a interest and a small bonus payment on top (20 euros, but every little helps I guess)

[BluthBanana]

Just like to say i think Digiweb have been fantastic for me..

[darkrabbit]

Not everyone has problems with Digiweb,
but there is majoirty that has, thats why we post up our opinions in
forums like this , mine in general has been the infamous caping and keeping your credit card details , now it is illegal for any company too do this unless
you signed a mandate that says they can, either using your credit card details or direct debit. after my experience which i state i went to my Bank
manager which by all means out lined that if i signed noting then a crime has been commited , and i should contact the guards to get it investigated or contact Digiweb and ask them why they do this and find some kind Compensation or explanation .

[BluthBanana]

"but there is majoirty that has"

How did you arrive at that conclusion..If the majority had, (which is what? anything over 50%), then they wouldn't be in business..Why would anyone have a problem with the capping..40gig limit is more than any other provider that i enquired about..

Anyway..i just felt i should add that I've been very pleased with my service..just to balance the argument..

[darkrabbit]

look do you read the other discussions out from even me ,
now let it be 5 percent or 50 percent it matter s not a majoirty is a word in context , but seeing that your the happy camper that is some what carrying a torch , why hell are you even in this post as such , what i have been stressing is my arguement about certain antics that digiweb did.
now if you want too crusade with been very pleased with your service then be my guest , and seen that you claimed that digiweb 40gig limit is more than any other provider that you enquired about.. your wrong IBB has no cap but there speeds are not over brillent,
but you can download till cows come home a matter of speaking

[BluthBanana]

Originally Posted by darkrabbit

look do you read the other discussions out from even me ,
now let it be 5 percent or 50 percent it matter s not a majoirty is a word in context , but seeing that your the happy camper that is some what carrying a torch , why hell are you even in this post as such , what i have been stressing is my arguement about certain antics that digiweb did.
now if you want too crusade with been very pleased with your service then be my guest , and seen that you claimed that digiweb 40gig limit is more than any other provider that you enquired about.. your wrong IBB has no cap but there speeds are not over brillent,
but you can download till cows come home a matter of speaking

Just about got through your post..Terrible grammar..You said majority, which isn't true..And on IBB, read the small print, it aint UNLIMITED..

[horizonuser]

I just about made it through your original post. You really should think about using correct grammar when posting. Anyway, like others have mentioned, if you ever signed a Direct Debit mandate then you are authorising Digiweb to debit your account then they can do so at anytime for any amount. If you didn't then they may still have an legal right to do so.

At little while ago I gave my credit card details for a service. About 2 years later I noticed that the same service provider had debited my credit card again, even though I had not reused the service since. I called my credit card company and to my surprise they insisted that if I give them details, just once, I am allowing them use the card until written confirmation otherwise. I tried arguing the point and gave an example of a supermarket using my credit card details years later and for unauthorised charges and the company insisted that, technically, they can until I write to them ordering them to stop.

I know it sounds madness, but there you go!

[BluthBanana]

Originally Posted by horizonuser

I just about made it through your original post. You really should think about using correct grammar when posting.

Who's that aimed at?? If your talking bout me, you can fcuk off cause I wasn't talking to you!! If not!! My apologies!!

[miceal]

Companies do not have to ask permission to record the call as long as one party knows the call is being recorded it is fine. However the call will not stand in any court of law.